Tale of the Tape: Rose v Hill

Took a look at the pre-draft measurements of the #1 overall pick in last week's draft Derrick Rose and the Spurs' 1st round pick George Hill. From a physical standpoint, Hill compares quite favorably to Rose (note: to reduce this thread by a few pages, I am not claiming that Hill is a comparable player to Rose).

Here's the tale of the tape:

Height w/o Shoes
Derrick Rose 6' 1.5"
George Hill 6' 1.25"

Height w/shoes
Rose 6' 2.5"
Hill 6' 2.5"

Weight
Rose 196
Hill 181

Wingspan
Rose 6' 8"
Hill 6' 9"

Standing Reach
Rose 8' 2.5"
Hill 8' 1.5"

Body Fat
Rose 4.6
Hill 3

No Step Vert
Rose 34.5"
Hill 34"

Max Vert
Rose 40"
Hill 37.5"

Bench Press
Rose 10
Hill 9

Lane Agility
Rose 11.69 sec
Hill 12.2 sec

3/4 Court Sprint
Rose 3.05 sec
Hill 3.07 sec

Rather comparable numbers. I think Rose is the slightly better athlete and the superior player, but Hill is no slouch. I believe the Spurs had Hill rated as one of the top 15 prospects in this draft. Other than the lane agility drill, his numbers are right up there with any other guard in the draft.

Also, Hairston and Gist performed rather well themselves. The Spurs apparently went into this draft looking for long, athletic, and experienced college players. Players who have the athleticism to survive in today's NBA, but perhaps some maturity as well.

:tu Wow, I never knew those stats.

Rose is slightly better than Hill. Not bad. I think Hill also has a good basketball IQ and is determined. He's looking more and more like a steal. :tu

Fire RC *sarcasm*

I will admit I was one of the MANY who typed in WHO? and FUCK! in the chatroom when Hill was drafted. Who was this kid that no one was talking about in the first? Why was he picked over players that were still there?

As time went on, it became clearer as to why. Now I can say I am happy and kind of excited to see this guy play.

Same thing for Gist.

It's also looking like the FO wasn't totally mailing it in by scouting only Kansas players, especially once they passed on Chalmers.

Getting 4 years seniors is an interesting way to look at it. We're getting players who were top recruits in High School but didn't get the same interest afterwards, for various reasons: the size of the school (Hill), the size of his waist (Hairston)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

I will admit I was one of the MANY who typed in WHO? and FUCK! in the chatroom when Hill was drafted. Who was this kid that no one was talking about in the first? Why was he picked over players that were still there?

---

I said the same things when the Spurs selected a French kid with an American-sounding name in 2001. Guess that taught me a lesson.

We'll see about Hill, but, as you suggest, I'm more inclined to trust the front office than I am inclined to get pissed because a bunch of draft analysts were underwhelmed by Hill.

I stick by the old saying, if Pop raves about a guy, more than likely that kid is gonna be good. Look at past players Pop has raved about. Kristic, guys along that line.

The only thing you can draw from this number is that Hill is really athletic and that he is big enough to play some SG.

Good for random Spurs trivia I guess....doesn't mean much.

Athleticism doesn't mean much?

I think the reason I was so upset is that I thought the Spurs were just selecting for someone else when there was still good talent but also I was upset because CDR was passed over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

I'm more inclined to trust the front office than I am inclined to get pissed because a bunch of draft analysts were underwhelmed by Hill.

---

or a bunch of SpursTalk board surfers........ self included.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Athleticism doesn't mean much?

---

It does seem like the Spurs made a conscientious attempt to get more athletic with this draft. Which is a good thing IMO, it's not hard to cut 2nd rounders. And Hill seems like a baller who is also athletic.

Spurs made a call. They could have been very right or they could have been very wrong, of course.

What is amusing is that now with the entire NBA (it seems like) selecting international talent, due in no small part to the Spurs' success in doing so, the Spurs went with three college seniors in the draft. Instead of searching Paris, Ljubljana, and Buenos Aires they went to Indianapolis, Eugene, and College Park. Perhaps now the edge of the basketball frontier is NCAA DI-AA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Spurs made a call. They could have been very right or they could have been very wrong, of course.

What is amusing is that now with the entire NBA (it seems like) selecting international talent, due in no small part to the Spurs' success in doing so, the Spurs went with three college seniors in the draft. Instead of searching Paris, Ljubljana, and Buenos Aires they went to Indianapolis, Eugene, and College Park. Perhaps now the edge of the basketball frontier is NCAA DI-AA.

---

I thought of that too. Interesting turnabout. If you think of some of the quality players that came up through the ranks from small schools back when the NBA draft was several rounds instead of two I think it makes a lot of sense to seriously scout the smaller schools looking for hidden gems.

In two rounds most of the marquee small school players get passed over, and you're right, the NBA is now so focused on europe that most of the major foreign talent gets mined out.

The Spurs were flying under the radar a bit when they went after Ginobili and Parker. Now every team makes euro scouting a top priority.

No doubt he's looking like a steal. What's got me excited is the heap of praise the normally reserved Spurs management has heaped upon him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Took a look at the pre-draft measurements of the #1 overall pick in last week's draft Derrick Rose and the Spurs' 1st round pick George Hill. From a physical standpoint, Hill compares quite favorably to Rose (note: to reduce this thread by a few pages, I am not claiming that Hill is a comparable player to Rose).

Here's the tale of the tape:

Height w/o Shoes
Derrick Rose 6' 1.5"
George Hill 6' 1.25"

Height w/shoes
Rose 6' 2.5"
Hill 6' 2.5"

Weight
Rose 196
Hill 181

Wingspan
Rose 6' 8"
Hill 6' 9"

Standing Reach
Rose 8' 2.5"
Hill 8' 1.5"

Body Fat
Rose 4.6
Hill 3

No Step Vert
Rose 34.5"
Hill 34"

Max Vert
Rose 40"
Hill 37.5"

Bench Press
Rose 10
Hill 9

Lane Agility
Rose 11.69 sec
Hill 12.2 sec

3/4 Court Sprint
Rose 3.05 sec
Hill 3.07 sec

Rather comparable numbers. I think Rose is the slightly better athlete and the superior player, but Hill is no slouch. I believe the Spurs had Hill rated as one of the top 15 prospects in this draft. Other than the lane agility drill, his numbers are right up there with any other guard in the draft.

Also, Hairston and Gist performed rather well themselves. The Spurs apparently went into this draft looking for long, athletic, and experienced college players. Players who have the athleticism to survive in today's NBA, but perhaps some maturity as well.

---

I hope this open many of the Chalmers fans eyes...Spurs pick a draft for a reason. Im shock before too...but im trying to figure out the reason why..I like how he shoot, and drive...but this statistics prove that I shouldnt curse at FO before research more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Helicopter Jones

I thought of that too. Interesting turnabout. If you think of some of the quality players that came up through the ranks from small schools back when the NBA draft was several rounds instead of two I think it makes a lot of sense to seriously scout the smaller schools looking for hidden gems.

In two rounds most of the marquee small school players get passed over, and you're right, the NBA is now so focused on europe that most of the major foreign talent gets mined out.

The Spurs were flying under the radar a bit when they went after Ginobili and Parker. Now every team makes euro scouting a top priority.

---

Did we not think that Dragic was a Spurs' pick and Hill was selected as part of a trade?

Anyways, I'm sure Thorn and Morey are taking notes.

your gonna hate me for this, but ive seen so many spurs drafts, with many different selections, some good, some bad, some gooder , some badder......i fell asleep during this past one...i didnt find out till the next monan, cos my son told me...college numbers do have meaning, some dont, i wait till i see them on the court, cos ive seen many spurs coaches, and pop isnt easy to play for, i dont care how good they are, getting playing minutes, are more important numbers to me, then any other number at all

I'm kinda excited because I think adding George Hill will allow the Spurs to play a three-guard alignment, kinda akin to what the Pistons did in the late 80's-early 90's. Imagine having Manu, TP, and Hill on the break? Should be sweet to watch! I see a lot of defenses getting broken down more with this kid. TP can break almost any defense with his penetration but his jump shot is spotty. Hill may not be as superior a penetrator as TP is, but the guy can kick out, run the pick and roll and knock the jumper off the screen. Can't wait to see Hill play in a Spurs uniform!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taking it to the Hole

I'm kinda excited because I think adding George Hill will allow the Spurs to play a three-guard alignment, kinda akin to what the Pistons did in the late 80's-early 90's. Imagine having Manu, TP, and Hill on the break? Should be sweet to watch! I see a lot of defenses getting broken down more with this kid. TP can break almost any defense with his penetration but his jump shot is spotty. Hill may not be as superior a penetrator as TP is, but the guy can kick out, run the pick and roll and knock the jumper off the screen. Can't wait to see Hill play in a Spurs uniform!

---

Good thought. Hmmm...with a 4 man who can hit the 3?

I can find 100 people lives in state of texas has the similar stat and nevr made it to the nba.

just food for thoughts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nil.ball

I can find 100 people lives in state of texas has the similar stat and nevr made it to the nba.

just food for thoughts

---

Well, then there is his body of collegiate work.

Well, for sure you need a SF that can shoot. I know Bowen is a good 3-point threat from the corners, but really you need someone who can shoot from the wings and corners. Delfino might add some shooting as well as Maggette. Tim would basically play center/PF. But things would be more spaced out for him to operate. I think Maggette is strong enough to rebound with most 4 men. So it may work out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Took a look at the pre-draft measurements of the #1 overall pick in last week's draft Derrick Rose and the Spurs' 1st round pick George Hill. From a physical standpoint, Hill compares quite favorably to Rose (note: to reduce this thread by a few pages, I am not claiming that Hill is a comparable player to Rose).

Here's the tale of the tape:

Height w/o Shoes
Derrick Rose 6' 1.5"
George Hill 6' 1.25"

Height w/shoes
Rose 6' 2.5"
Hill 6' 2.5"

Weight
Rose 196
Hill 181

Wingspan
Rose 6' 8"
Hill 6' 9"

Standing Reach
Rose 8' 2.5"
Hill 8' 1.5"

Body Fat
Rose 4.6
Hill 3

No Step Vert
Rose 34.5"
Hill 34"

Max Vert
Rose 40"
Hill 37.5"

Bench Press
Rose 10
Hill 9

Lane Agility
Rose 11.69 sec
Hill 12.2 sec

3/4 Court Sprint
Rose 3.05 sec
Hill 3.07 sec

Rather comparable numbers. I think Rose is the slightly better athlete and the superior player, but Hill is no slouch. I believe the Spurs had Hill rated as one of the top 15 prospects in this draft. Other than the lane agility drill, his numbers are right up there with any other guard in the draft.

Also, Hairston and Gist performed rather well themselves. The Spurs apparently went into this draft looking for long, athletic, and experienced college players. Players who have the athleticism to survive in today's NBA, but perhaps some maturity as well.

---

Right on the money, spurs had hill ranked a top 10 player so either they are incredibly shrewd or dumb as hell.....I go with the first but I do wonder why hill over chalmers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurman20

Right on the money, spurs had hill ranked a top 10 player so either they are incredibly shrewd or dumb as hell.....I go with the first but I do wonder why hill over chalmers?

---

I think they chose Hill because he has improved his game every year since he started playing collegiately except for one season where he was injured, but otherwise I think the Spurs like players who have something to prove to themselves if not to others. Chalmers doesn't strike me as the humble, hardworking type that is going to do anything he can to help his team win. Hill has the right attitude so much that he impressed Pop and that isn't easy to do.

nice.

It will be so nice when SL begins and we get some inkling of Hills game and potential. First game against the Grizzlies should be interesting.

Experience/Accomplishments

Derrick Rose: took his team to the college National Championship
George Hill: played at IUPUI

Draftexpress.com is a great website. Hill has an amazing wingspan for a guy his size, which often seems to be a pretty common factor for good players. There's a strong belief among many scouts that the "T-Rex" syndrome-- short arms in relation to height-- is a major factor in why some good college players don't succeed in the NBA. I remember reading one piece a few years ago where one scout said there was no way JJ Reddick would succeed in the NBA because of this physical attribute. One guy who had a shorter than usual wingspan measurement this year was Jarrryd Bayless from Arizona. It'll be very interesting if George Hill becomes a legit NBA player and Bayless underperforms... something to keep an eye on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

Experience/Accomplishments

Derrick Rose: took his team to the college National Championship
George Hill: played at IUPUI

---

Exactly, the stats posted on page 1 are interesting, but to take that info and draw some type of conclusion as to what type of player Hill will be is a mistake. There is a reason Rose was the expected #1 and Hill was expected to be a 2nd round pick even with their similiar athletic numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __JaG__

Experience/Accomplishments

Derrick Rose: took his team to the college National Championship
George Hill: played at IUPUI

---

Now,now:

Jacques Vaughn: led Kansas to best regular season record in country and took his team to the Final Four
Steve Nash: played at Santa Clara

I just checked Sonny Weems vs Mayo........ Weems is better in nearly every category :lol

Here's hoping that Hill and Weems outplay Rose and Mayo :toast :smokin

(of course im joking. We all know those pre-draft stats are interesting but don't take into consideration talent).

I know Hill will turn out to be a better pick than most think. I know Weems isn't going to be much for the Nuggets, heck he may not even play, but its fun waiting and seeing if later picks will contribute effectively.

He has the same physical tooks as Rose. He chose to play at IUPUI due to personal reasons, but was recruited by Florida and some other major DI-A programs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Express-News

Coming out of Broad Ripple High School in Indianapolis, Hill entertained scholarship offers from Temple and Indiana. He could have played for back-to-back national championship teams at Florida.

Instead, he chose to remain in Indianapolis, the city in which he was born and raised. He opted to stay, in part, to be near his great-grandfather Gilbert Edison, whose health was failing.

“I wanted to stay close to home so he could see me play, if he ever got better,” Hill said.

Hill's great grandfather never got the chance. He died two months after Hill inked his letter-of-intent.

Hill's loyalty was IUPUI's gain: As a fourth-year junior last season, Hill starred in obscurity, averaging 21.5 points per game and garnering Player of the Year honors in the Summit League.

---

source

So Rose goes to a talent laden Memphis program, plays in the national title game, and ends up as the #1 overall pick. Hill plays at D-IAA IUPUI, stars, and is a surprise low 1st round pick.

We're about to find out how much that difference really means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tully365

Now,now:

Jacques Vaughn: led Kansas to best regular season record in country and took his team to the Final Four
Steve Nash: played at Santa Clara

---

actually, vaughn never got the jayhawks to the final four. (i realize that wasn't the crux of your post, but i will be DAMNED if i let the jayhawks get any unearned credit on this board.)

look at this here fellas

if you are going to knock on HILL for playin in a shitty division with his stats, compare to him other players in history who have played against scrubs or in HS that posted nasty numbers, its too early to name him a bust, but i like what i see if that can be transferred to the nba.

heck bogut played in a shitty division and was no.1 pick......

HILL was a steal if its true his a top15 prospect that happen to fall to us.

C+

The NBA has seen so many unheralded players coming from obscure schools who have had/are having great careers in the league. Granted, they are exceptions to the rule but I have a good feeling about George Hill.. how many HS grads would voluntarily choose to play for an unknown school after he had been courted by the big name programs? I really think he could be the next diamond in the rough for the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tully365

Draftexpress.com is a great website. Hill has an amazing wingspan for a guy his size, which often seems to be a pretty common factor for good players. There's a strong belief among many scouts that the "T-Rex" syndrome-- short arms in relation to height-- is a major factor in why some good college players don't succeed in the NBA. I remember reading one piece a few years ago where one scout said there was no way JJ Reddick would succeed in the NBA because of this physical attribute. One guy who had a shorter than usual wingspan measurement this year was Jarrryd Bayless from Arizona. It'll be very interesting if George Hill becomes a legit NBA player and Bayless underperforms... something to keep an eye on.

---

re: wingspan

a more accurate measurement would be for straight reach or arm length. Someone with very broad shoulders could have a deceptively large wingspan with relatively normal length arms. Conversely, someone with narrow shoulders and long arms could register as being unimpressive in winspan.

Doesn't it strike anyone odd that Hill has an inch longer wingspan but an inch shorter standing reach than Rose? Is that because Rose has a short neck for his body? Or shoulders more narrow than Hill? Or do Hill's shoulders sit lower than normal for his height? Who knows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K-State Spur

actually, vaughn never got the jayhawks to the final four. (i realize that wasn't the crux of your post, but i will be DAMNED if i let the jayhawks get any unearned credit on this board.)

---

:lmao

I understand man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant

Took a look at the pre-draft measurements of the #1 overall pick in last week's draft Derrick Rose and the Spurs' 1st round pick George Hill. From a physical standpoint, Hill compares quite favorably to Rose (note: to reduce this thread by a few pages, I am not claiming that Hill is a comparable player to Rose).

Here's the tale of the tape:

Height w/o Shoes
Derrick Rose 6' 1.5"
George Hill 6' 1.25"

Height w/shoes
Rose 6' 2.5"
Hill 6' 2.5"

Weight
Rose 196
Hill 181

Wingspan
Rose 6' 8"
Hill 6' 9"

Standing Reach
Rose 8' 2.5"
Hill 8' 1.5"

Body Fat
Rose 4.6
Hill 3

No Step Vert
Rose 34.5"
Hill 34"

Max Vert
Rose 40"
Hill 37.5"

Bench Press
Rose 10
Hill 9

Lane Agility
Rose 11.69 sec
Hill 12.2 sec

3/4 Court Sprint
Rose 3.05 sec
Hill 3.07 sec

Rather comparable numbers. I think Rose is the slightly better athlete and the superior player, but Hill is no slouch. I believe the Spurs had Hill rated as one of the top 15 prospects in this draft. Other than the lane agility drill, his numbers are right up there with any other guard in the draft.

Also, Hairston and Gist performed rather well themselves. The Spurs apparently went into this draft looking for long, athletic, and experienced college players. Players who have the athleticism to survive in today's NBA, but perhaps some maturity as well.

---

why would george hill's shoes be .25" taller than rose's?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hillcrest

why would george hill's shoes be .25" taller than rose's?

---

Maybe he's "gellin"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by objective

Maybe he's "gellin"

---

Oh yeah......

He's sooooooooo gellin. :lol

it's about what you do on the court
not what you do with the measuring stick

Im not sure Hill has the size to play the 2.... first of all hes very slight... and seconly being nearly 6'3" in shoes... his standing reach isnt all that impressive.

His wingspan is fantastic and thats definately more crucial at the PG spot than standing reach... allowing him to bother his opponents with his reach and get into the passing lanes.

I think his standing reach doesnt really allow him to play much at the 2... he has really long arms so this is probably resulting from Shelden Williams syndrome (long head).

Consider im 6'4" and i have a standing reach of 8'5"... yet my wingspan is only 6'5"

Nearly all of these guys do extensive stretching throughout their high school years to gain that extra inch... just like vertical reach training.

Oh, and im white.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K-State Spur

actually, vaughn never got the jayhawks to the final four. (i realize that wasn't the crux of your post, but i will be DAMNED if i let the jayhawks get any unearned credit on this board.)

---

Faulty memory on my part. Good catch. Mike Bibby and Arizona knocked them out in the sweet 16.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by objective

re: wingspan

a more accurate measurement would be for straight reach or arm length. Someone with very broad shoulders could have a deceptively large wingspan with relatively normal length arms. Conversely, someone with narrow shoulders and long arms could register as being unimpressive in winspan.

Doesn't it strike anyone odd that Hill has an inch longer wingspan but an inch shorter standing reach than Rose? Is that because Rose has a short neck for his body? Or shoulders more narrow than Hill? Or do Hill's shoulders sit lower than normal for his height? Who knows?

---

You can see how some scouts start obsessing over these numbers, looking for subtle indicators. I bet if any guy from the US olympic track team was tested for speed/agility/vertical leap, he'd rate a super athlete with "huge upside' even if he'd never touched a basketball in his life.